According to the accountability principle a person’s fair allocation takes into account the input-relevant variables she can inﬂuence, like eﬀort, but not the variables she cannot inﬂuence, like a randomly assigned exogenous factor. This study is based on a real eﬀort-task experiment, where the exogenous inﬂuence is twofold: it comes either as a production factor or as a bonus. We conﬁrm that in a base treatment, i.e in absence of exogenous factors, subjects base their allocation decisions largely on eﬀort. When exogenous diﬀerences are present behavior changes. Whereas bonuses are largely ignored and subjects still mostly base their decisions on eﬀort, production factors render allocations more selﬁsh. Furthermore, we study whether accountability holds for decisions over opportunities. We apply the so-called lottery-points-method, where a binary lottery in the last experimental stage allocates the whole amount to one of the workers. We ﬁnd that subjects claim more for themselves when allocating opportunities in all treatments.